Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Repo info
Activity
    manoj2patil
    @manoj2patil
    hi any one can looking the xrdp utilixed huge bandwidth utilization. please look into
    matt335672
    @matt335672

    I'm posting this developer info here in response to a query on the xrdp-questions thread.

    Should I put this on the wiki maybe?

    SCP Protocol

    V1 Current Status

    As far as I can tell, the current state of affairs with SCP V1 is as follows:-

    • SCP V1 appears to be the brainchild of a user ilsimo. This account no longer exists, in that the links to it from the commits below no longer work.
      -SCP V1 was added in commit 078b4d3f4127042b020e78bb9d9762196ff070c3 by ilsimo along with the sestest utility (Nov 2006). The idea seems to have been to add a more capable protocol allowing for password changes, etc. SCP V0 was left 'as is', as SCP V1 is new and needs some work.
    • In commit 7c7929861246310d48789748cc150c9a4a492e09 (Sep 2008), a management sub-protocol was added to SCP V1 along with sesadmin, providing a list function and a kill function (not plumbed in).
    • The last commit I can find to the project from ilsimo was 1cae42594b7d3958a6c92a201086afcbbe065fda. This was also on the same day as the previous commit but about half-an-hour later.
    • There's one pretty serious problem I've found with SCP V1 (which I've shared with metalefty).

    It will also be obvious to the reader that SCP V1 is pretty code-heavy and hence has a high maintenance overhead. For example, there's no need for the protocol to handle password changes. The protocol should simply be wrapping the PAM dialog and xrdp should be prompting the user as appropriate. This would also allow for proper 2FA to be introduced with barely any changes to our code.

    Other badly needed system functions are reconnection and NLA. Both of these will require a dialog between xrdp and sesman. Having a simpler protocol will make it easier to get these implemented.

    Next step

    My current plan is to remove the unused SCP V1 code in the near future (i.e. when we get #1708 merged). This should make the existing libscp a little easier to navigate.

    Future requirements

    A replacement protocol needs to satisfy the following requirements:-

    • Merge V0 and V1 functionality into one protocol
    • Not do more than it needs to at the protocol level.
    • Be simple to understand and maintain - this is critical for getting more developers involved in this area of XRDP.
    • Support local authentication for management functions. An administrator should be able to disconnect or stop sessions without needing to reauthenticate.
    aquesnel
    @aquesnel
    +1 to putting this in the wiki
    metalefty
    @metalefty
    Have anyone encountered this? neutrinolabs/xrdp#1740
    I'm trying to log the return value of unlink to debug. Maybe unlink needs to be retried sometime.
    I guess the deletion fails due to EBUSY.
    matt335672
    @matt335672
    Not seen that particular one, but that's down to the user cases I've encountered. I've added some thoughts to #1740
    matt335672
    @matt335672

    @metalefty - any thoughts on what PRs to focus on for inclusion in v0.9.15?

    I was wondering about 1692, 1703, 1727, 1738 and 1741

    Anything you think should be added to or omitted from that list?

    Thanks.

    metalefty
    @metalefty
    first of all, I think we should finish logging as some changes on logging are already merged.
    I've created v0.9.15 milestone https://github.com/neutrinolabs/xrdp/milestone/12
    metalefty
    @metalefty
    I've applied v0.9.15 milestone to some but not finished.
    matt335672
    @matt335672
    Agreed about the logging. 1742 could potentially be left out. It's quite a big change and I've not looked at it yet. It's also dependent on 1738.
    aquesnel
    @aquesnel
    @metalefty for v0.9.15 I'd recommend including #1753 since it fixes some logging changes that was introduced since v0.9.14.
    I agree with @matt335672 that #1742 can be left out of v0.9.15 since there are still more logging related pull requests that I plan on submitting in the future.
    @metalefty when you have a chance can you please take a look at #1738 and let me know if there is additional feedback that needs to be completed before merging?
    metalefty
    @metalefty
    hi, i'll look them one by one
    metalefty
    @metalefty
    I remember @matt335672 implemented the feature to turn off FUSE by config. Is my memory right?
    1 reply
    metalefty
    @metalefty
    okay, agreed about #1742.
    metalefty
    @metalefty
    as usual, i'll make a xorxrdp release ahead of xrdp. xorxrdp v0.2.15 will include following fixes
    Nexarian
    @Nexarian
    Would it be possible to get the nvidia_hack and egfx branches rebased off of the new release once it comes out?
    Looks like there's a ton of excellent stability enhancements that these prototypes would benefit from.
    metalefty
    @metalefty
    metalefty
    @metalefty
    @Nexarian I hope @jsorg71 do so.
    matt335672
    @matt335672
    I believe the xrdp NEWS page is now up-to-date as far as my recent merge of neutrinolabs/xrdp#1703 (commit aa5c5daf7e1867fd349f410b6a0d4dd5d2d102c4).
    metalefty
    @metalefty
    thanks alot!
    metalefty
    @metalefty
    Regarding known issues, I confirmed #965 doesn't reproduce with current Windows 10. So I'm removing it from NEWS.
    metalefty
    @metalefty
    After merging #1753, I'll perform a test for 1 or 2 days. Then I'll start to release v0.9.15.
    matt335672
    @matt335672
    @metalefty - are you happy to give me write access to NeutrinoRDP? I've raised a pretty trivial PR there but I'm unable to merge it. Thanks.
    Issa
    @gamersalpha
    yooooo
    XRDp works good, but What got not sound
    that's razy
    NO sound, why
    metalefty
    @metalefty
    I remember I don’t have enough privilege to do that but I’ll give it a try
    metalefty
    @metalefty
    @matt335672 unfortunately, I don't have any write access to NeutrinoRDP. Jay is responsible for that.
    matt335672
    @matt335672

    Thanks for trying!

    @jsorg71 - Are you happy to give me write access to the NeutrinoRDP repository? Thanks.

    metalefty
    @metalefty
    I've merged all PRs to be merged before v0.9.15. Please don't anything until the release announcement.
    the rest thing we need to finish is the document, especially NEWS.
    metalefty
    @metalefty
    I'm checking the known issues part. #965 is no longer an issue. We did nothing with #1266 and it should be addressed to be protocol compliant.
    However, FreeRDP 2.2.0 can connect to xrdp even without +glyph-cache. I guess something has been changed on the FreeRDP side.
    So we can remove #1266 entry from the known issues part but keep it open.
    metalefty
    @metalefty
    @matt335672 @aquesnel BTW, I wrote down some ideas on logging on #1762. Any feedback is welcome.
    Pininamix
    @Pininamix
    Hello, I have this issue trying to RDP in to a Suse server from Debian server, I get this: VNC connecting to 127.0.0.1:5923, VNC error, Problem connecting, some problem.
    Seslog shows:
    [20201226-10:57:27] [ERROR] X server for display 23 startup timeout
    [20201226-10:57:27] [ERROR] another Xserver might already be active on display 23 - see log
    Help please I have not been able to find a solution for this in internet this was working before Suse did an upgrade.
    OS: SUSE Linux 12 SP5 x86_64
    metalefty
    @metalefty
    @Pininamix Did you read the welcome message shown before joining this room?
    Pininamix
    @Pininamix
    Not really.
    !welcome
    My apologies if this is the wrong place to look for help.